Stock In Smilies Plumets

August 13, 2005

I have seen some interesting ways to get bonus smilies recently but I have seen them drop to a new lower standard now. The following is an log entry from a cache.

Well, this was an unexpected surprise! I will be moving soon to xxxxxxxxxxx and decided to let XXXXXXXXXXXX adopt some of my caches that will be pretty far from my new home. After they graciously agreed, and the transfer was complete, this cache popped up in my unfound box. So I guess I get to log it! I was really feeling sad about giving these away, but now I get to put another smiley in my Found column, so all is not lost!

Now this has so far been done to at least 9 caches by this user. The cacher has not gone to find them but feels collecting the smiley as a find is more than fair without doing so. One of the caches has even been temp archived since May and has still not been replaced the cacher or by the new owner. As this cacher is in the top 200 for finds on all of GC.com it makes it really apparent that I or anyone could randomly log caches till you are number one. That or log each cache you find dozens of times till you can claim top smiley count. How could you even say out loud that I have xxxx finds after doing things like this or other non find means of gaining extra smilies.

It seems that making caches only findable once would be a big step to making these numbers make some sense and actually having a basis for being there since it does say FOUND right by the number.

Wolf

9.3k · August 13, 2005

Remember the "Serenity Prayer"? One line went something like Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. This falls under the catagory of "cannot change". Everybody gets something different out of this game. Obviously this person feels that since they've been to the cache location, (when placing it), and written in the log book, (when writing the intro log), that they've met the qualifications for logging a find, once the cache passed from their ownership.

Do I agree that this is a pretty lame way to increase their smiley count? Sure. Do I feel that this person should adhere to my way of thinking? No. Personally, if I wanted to log a find at a cache I'd given to someone else, I'd go back to the cache, trade up, sign the log book and then collect my smiley, but that's just me.

Gettin' worked up over how someone else plays a game ain't worth it. Life is short, go find some cache!

August 13, 2005

I am most deffinatly not getting worked up about it. I found it rather entertaining that the first time I had met many cachers when I got started at a couple of events they would introduce themselves and what thier find number was at that time. Stuff like I am wolfnwendy and I have 200 finds. I was originally told that everything revolved around the find number. And as I had less than 100 finds back then It was stressed that I was a newbie compared to others. Since then we just enjoy the hunts and my wife loggs whatever she feels the need for for the find. I no longer take much interest in the found number. On some various Yahoo groups about GC though it comes up that some list is updated and that certain individuals are on it for big find numbers. My caching therory has changed dramaticly since I started and have seen that it is setup for everyone to get what they want out if it. I would just love to see what would happen to many BIG FINDERS if all caches were suddenly only worth 1 found.

August 13, 2005

Doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. They aren't randomly logging finds, they're logging finds for caches that they created AFTER they've been transferred. Not that big a transgression really (if a transgression at all.)

They're simply moving a count from the Hide column to the Found column. They were there at the cache location after all. Heck, I might do the same, but backdate the find to the date I placed the cache (without claiming an FTF, of course.)

August 13, 2005

You have to admit it is a bit lame. I thought finding the stuff was part of the fun. I mean part of the GC logo is you are the search engine. This runs the same line as buying yourself christmas presents or hiding the easter eggs before you go looking for them yourself.

I am also enjoying the email I just got from a cache owner.

As I own over 100 caches with more than 90 percent being micros/film cans I cannot and do not read most of the 100s of cache owner emails I get a week. I am also not going to run around to everyone of them to see if any need repair. If I pass anywhere near one I check it. I have not been near enough to that cache to do any repairs to it but will look into replacing the log soon.

This person found a cache 500 ft from the one the email was about 2 days before I sent her a direct note about problems with her cache as she had not responded to a couple of months worth of people asking for her to maintain her caches in the logs. many cache owners like this one are not leaving caches behind but geo litter.

August 13, 2005

I'm not sure I understand why that would be so terrible. I assume as original cache owner the individual had made multiple visits to the caches in question, so who cares if they log them as found now? (I mean, the OP does of course, but how does it really hurt the OP or anyone else?) They've made an investment of time and money and elbow grease. Is allowing such a person -- who has apparently contributed significantly to the geocaching community -- one smiley per cache adopted out unreasonable?

Would you propose that the new owners delete their find logs (assuming they had indeed found them under original ownership) on the caches they've adopted?

I'm very new at this, but I guess the numbers don't mean so much to me -- at least not other people's numbers. Numbers show who is a newbie and just learning, but after a certain point they become less meaningful other than to oneself. I don't look at a cacher with 400 finds as any less of a cacher than someone with 1400. After all, everyone has different circumstances that dictate what numbers they achieve -- things like physical limitations, work schedules and family time commitments, availability and reliability of transportation, number of caches hidden in their area, etc.

Personally I will celebrate my own milestone acheivements because each cache found represents the special time my family and I share together and the adventure we experience. I will congratulate others on their milestone achievements as well, but I'm not going to go and audit them to determine how many were legitimate finds or anything. Do I think inflating one's numbers is cool? No. But I'm not their keeper, and this isn't a competition. Their number means nothing to me. The only one that does is my own.

In any case, I think the specific case mentioned by the OP is by far different than the ways I've heard others inflate their numbers. I don't think allowing them their smiley is so terrible in this case.

2.6k · August 13, 2005

You have to admit it is a bit lame.

Allow me to join you in crying lame. It isn't a tragedy, a travesty or even a Very Big Deal, but logging your own caches when they've been adopted out (and not even visiting them again for the purpose) is, indeed, LAME.

And lameness is almost as annoying as "don't get upset, it's only a game."

August 13, 2005

As for the separate topic of the cache owner's email, THAT I do feel is lame. But I guess that's what the SBA function is for. There's no excuse for not maintaining the cache, unless the people asking it to be maintained didn't do so via a note or DNF log. I can see how someone would overlook it if they only got the notes saying "so-and-so found whatever-it's-called cache". If they never got notifications that someone specifically posted a note for or did not find the cache in question, there wouldn't be anything to alert them to open the emails and look at the logs if they didn't have the interest or time.

38.2k · August 13, 2005

I would just love to see what would happen to many BIG FINDERS if all caches were suddenly only worth 1 found...

...of if they actually had to find all the caches.

This is usually about this point where someone jumps into one of these threads and says something like "What's it to you? "It doesn't hurt anyone." Well in this case I guess not, but in general lying about finds is not harmless.

If someone comes along and logs a false find, they are in effect telling the geocaching community that the cache is there. This could result in people going after the cache and wasting their time. This is particularly true if someone lies about finding a cache with a string of DNFs, because it could send a bunch of people who have been watching it, but hesitant to search for it, out after it.

I recall one geocacher who was enticed into a fruitless, 100 mile RT drive by someone who lied about finding a long missing cache. Many others have been lured out by fake finds. Not only that, they may put additional effort into their search because "It has to be here, xxxxx found it yesterday". Many of us only get so much time to geocache and wasting it does not sit well.

Lying about finds could also fool an owner into thinking his cache is there and fine, when it actually needs to be replaced.

Whenever we search for a cache we take a chance that it isn't there, but when another geocacher deliberately misleads community, its beyond unethical.

August 13, 2005

I am also enjoying the email I just got from a cache owner.

As I own over 100 caches with more than 90 percent being micros/film cans I cannot and do not read most of the 100s of cache owner emails I get a week. I am also not going to run around to everyone of them to see if any need repair. If I pass anywhere near one I check it. I have not been near enough to that cache to do any repairs to it but will look into replacing the log soon.

This person found a cache 500 ft from the one the email was about 2 days before I sent her a direct note about problems with her cache as she had not responded to a couple of months worth of people asking for her to maintain her caches in the logs. many cache owners like this one are not leaving caches behind but geo litter.

You're talking apples and oranges.

You start the thread off with what you consider one type of transgression (logging finds for caches owned after they've been transferred), and then you start discussing other completely unrelated topics (such as owners who can't be bothered to do maintenance on their caches because they own hundreds of them.)

Where exactly is this thread supposed to go? You keep taking it all over the place. What does maintenance have to do with "stock in smilies"?

Edited August 13, 2005 by dogbreathcanada

6.1k · August 13, 2005

It IS lame. But not worth getting upset about. There are worse things - cachers trading garbage for useful items, people muggling caches(with a GPS), someone finding a white jeep TB and then using it as permanent decoration around their house, cachers finding a cache and then leaving the lid off of it and out in the open, having the bomb squad finding your cache(in a remote location even) and blowing it up, the price of gas affecting your smilie count - I could go on and on...... If you meet the cacher at an event, just pretend at first that you dont know that they logged their own caches as a find. Then, ask him/her how many finds that they have. When they respond, open your eyes real wide and exclaim "WOW". Next, say "Wait, arent YOU the cacher that logged their own caches as a find?" After they try to explain - let out a HUGE laugh. The more people around the better. Try it.

7.2k · August 13, 2005

I wouldn't mind of public find counts went away.

We already have the ignore list to remove caches from nearest lists for those we don't want to do, we helped hide or a host of other reasons. There is no legitimate reason to claim a smilie on a cache that was not "found."

'Nuff said.

7.2k · August 13, 2005

It IS lame. But not worth getting upset about.

There's a difference between getting upset and not letting it slide. The second is what I got from the OP.

3.8k · August 13, 2005

I was originally told that everything revolved around the find number. And as I had less than 100 finds back then It was stressed that I was a newbie compared to others.

This is sad.

My first event I went to I had only 3 finds. I thought for sure that it would be an issue, but it wasn't. I met probably 40-50 cachers that day and not one made an issue out of my find count. I helped out at the "check in" table with a guy who had 400 finds and we talked about caching and different things and it was never a problem. I have no doubt that if I hadn't been treated that well on that day, I'd not be where I am now. I feel very honored to have been chosen to help run the club I joined that day.

Back on topic, yes, it's possible to log multiple finds on a cache. I saw a cache the other day that the guy logged it 5 times in one day. Not even over a period of time like he went back to it with a friend. Doesn't bother me, just kind of feel "What were they thinking?" If a cache you already found pops up in your unfound again, check it out. If it looks to be the same hide, just hit the ignore button.

9.4k · August 13, 2005

When you hide a cache, you are credited with a "hide" in your stats. If you transfer the ownership, your "hide" is erased. That's it, no credit for setting up the cache, maintaining it for however long, etc. What's wrong with keeping the total hides/finds number the same? If you lose a hide, you gain a find, and your total stays the same.

August 13, 2005

I was originally told that everything revolved around the find number. And as I had less than 100 finds back then It was stressed that I was a newbie compared to others.

Numbers matter only if you want them to. Enjoy caching for the reasons you choose and don't feel compelled to follow anyone else's lead (including mine). By the same token, don't worry what others are doing too much, so long as it stays within the Generally Accepted Principles.

In over 4 years, I have just barely 300 finds. But, the photos and stories from those finds are priceless. I couldn't give a rats butt how many finds a person has--it's not a factor in how I treat people or expect to be treated by others. Caching, for me, is a means to an end, not the end itself.

I have friends who are about the numbers and I enjoy going out with them, but it's not about grabbing smileys. I enjoy the companionship and the chance of something bizarre happening. When left to myself, I'm more interested in climbing a mountain or bicycling down a trail.

"Why log at all?" (a.k.a. the Team360 defense)

I log caches so that I and others have a record of my presence, not to use it as a gauge against others. It also lets the owner and others know that the cache is intact and findable. If we didn't have a count, that would be fine with me.

Peace.

edit: stoopid speelling misteaks

Edited August 13, 2005 by TresOkies++

3.8k · August 13, 2005

The original owner of the caches found the spot for them; no problemo aqui.

I don't even perceive of it as lame. If he hasn't been to the sites recently, though, it could be misleading to others contemplating the finds.

I wouldn't call it lying or cheating, just slightly misleading.

August 13, 2005

I am really liking that everyone has a different opinion on this. Sorry about the part about maintaining a cache. I had gotten a message while in the middle of starting this tread and it struck me funny. I agree about having people seek a cache that is not there. One of the logging of the cachers own is an archived cache that has been missing for months and the new owner has not put one in. So this is an archived cache of the original cachers that was "found" without anything being there and that cacher has knowledge it is not there.

I no longer take stock in find numbers. My wife logs what she wants. I enjoy hunting for caches and seeing areas that I would never get to without being part of this great activity. It has actually gotten me into other outdoor fun that i am enjoying also. Geocaching is now a way to enjoy other things I do a little more.

Wolf

August 13, 2005

I find it interesting that WolfnWendy are crying foul over this, when they themselves have logged the same cache more than once on the same account -- apparently to account for when Wolf found it at a different time than Wendy. So it looks likes WolfnWendy's numbers are inflated, too.

Those in glass houses....

24.7k · August 13, 2005

I'm guilty of at least one of these types of logs.

Then again I've adopted caches moved ithem changed them a bit and what's not for the old owner to not find?

Enough blather. I need to paint my fence. Where's that fence painting frog when you need it? I'd even settle for a fence sitting frog....

9.2k · August 13, 2005

Yes, it's pretty lame. But not a bad as those who look around for a cache, decide for themselves that it's missing, then put out their own replacement cache and claim it as a find.

August 13, 2005

I know that kills me too. I couldnt find it so I hid a micro for you. Now I will log the find.

As for my inflated numbers my wife handles the logs and I think there are a few she has done the multi smileys for whatever the cache requested. If there is a double log for seperate finds I am just not aware but do not care enough to go look for it. There is also a monthly event we attend that does not get a new cache page every month and many are in debate as to whether to log it only once or once a month every time you go to the event at the new location. I also do not have people throw me parties for hitting high smiley numbers nor claim to be one of the top cachers in my state. I have long ago stopped logging save the rare and exiting cache. My wife handles the rest as she sees fit for the situation. I have met cachers in this area that do not even log anything on GC. They find the cache log it there and that is it. Multi smilies are an old hat and as I learned pretty fast that the found number is not an indication of anything anymore if my wife didnt log them there is a good chance there would be very little logged at all.

August 13, 2005

I'm just saying, before you go crying foul over someone else's number, you'd better be sure yours are all on the up and up. It only took me two seconds to pull up your first cache found with 2 finds by your username. I don't know if there are others, but there could be. Don't worry so much about someone else's numbers if you're not going to be a stickler for your own. And don't say you don't care about the numbers, because if you didn't you wouldn't have brought this up in the first place. You should at least be sure of your own accuracy if you're going to out someone else for inflating their numbers.

August 14, 2005

Yes, it's pretty lame. But not a bad as those who look around for a cache, decide for themselves that it's missing, then put out their own replacement cache and claim it as a find.

Back in my earlier caching days I did just this & you're right, it's pretty lame.

The cache was actually gone & the empty hook on the tree proved that. I left a makeshift container with a puesdo logbook & a couple of trade items. Glad I did as it was found a short time later so at least I saved them the aggravation. It turned out the hider had quit & I later placed a cache in the same area cause it was a neat spot.

Anyways, the other night I got to thinking about the fact I'd logged it as a find (and it truly wasn't) & never had went back to change it to a note. It's now updated & I'do believe I'm sleeping at least 12 minutes longer each night.

Hopefully all wrong-doer's will right their ways in the future. You know who you are.

2.2k · August 14, 2005

yeah bit lame...

but what's wrong with buying yourself a christmas present? or an easter egg?? dadgum good excuse to get the thing you want!

9.3k · August 14, 2005

I think that if I ever moved, I'd archive my caches, take them with me & hide them near my new digs. If I had a cache that I felt should stay, then I might ask for someone to adopt it. Once that cacher took over my old cache, I'd pay a final maintanance visit, restock it with some goodies, sign the logbook something to the effect of, "This cache now belongs to XXX. Thank you XXX for adopting it!" Then I would log it as a find without feeling guilty.

3.8k · August 14, 2005

3.8k · August 14, 2005

Stock In Smilies Plumets, Getting more worthless by the minute

BTW, glad I didn't invest heavily.

1.5k · August 14, 2005

I just kind of giggle when somebody non-chalantly uses a smilie to post information for their caches. You know you've seen it at some point, and I actually once said: "Oh wow, this person's a noob and didn't choose "post a note". After two or three more within a week, I was like...uhm, okay, I get it already, they want the numbers! Hey, no sweat off my back, do whatcha like, but I might giggle at it.

August 14, 2005

Hmm... OK.. We just had a cacher leave the area... Well actually his "going away party" is Sun. He had around 80 or 90 hides in the area and had no way of keeping them all in check. He archived some of them and adopted out about 1/3 of them. The other 1/3 he kept. I adopted 4 of his micros and Yes, I let him log them all as finds. It's not like he doesn't know where they are. I'm almost positive he's been there before. Any missing or questionable caches were archived as well as a series of caches he'd placed at the college he was attending here.

The college series consisted of 10 caches. Two days before their archival I went out to find them all. One I DNF'd, and one had been snatched. I say snatched because the people who took it had left part of the cache behind. It had been attached to a tree with a string. The string was there as was a piece of the cache lid. I logged a DNF on this cache as well. However, I later changed it to a find because the owner told me I had in fact found a part of the cache and since it would not be replaced I could count it.

I was leary of doing it, but given permission from the cache owner BEFORE logging it as a find, I felt it would be acceptable. I did not sign a log, but I did have what remained of the cache in my hands.

There is a difference between logging a find with owners permission and taking it upon yourself to convert a cache to a virtual just so you can log it.

2.6k · August 14, 2005

I adopted 4 of his micros and Yes, I let him log them all as finds. It's not like he doesn't know where they are. I'm almost positive he's been there before.

Well, yes, that's rather the point. Taking credit for finding something you hid yourself is lame.

38.2k · August 14, 2005

When you hide a cache, you are credited with a "hide" in your stats. If you transfer the ownership, your "hide" is erased. That's it, no credit for setting up the cache, maintaining it for however long, etc. What's wrong with keeping the total hides/finds number the same? If you lose a hide, you gain a find, and your total stays the same.

I'd say that if the count is so important to you then just archive the cache and let someone else place one there. You can even be nice and leave them the ammo box. As AW said above, its pretty lame to take credit for a find for something you hid no matter why you are doing it.

August 14, 2005

I like keeping track of my numbers but I realize they are only of interest to me. Every cachers sets their own rules about what they will log. Because each cacher has a different set of rules (and for a number of other reasons) they do not mean anything relative to one another. What matters is whether or not you are respected within the community and whether or not you respect yourself. Amen.

2.1k · August 14, 2005

You have to admit it is a bit lame.

Allow me to join you in crying lame. It isn't a tragedy, a travesty or even a Very Big Deal, but logging your own caches when they've been adopted out (and not even visiting them again for the purpose) is, indeed, LAME.

And lameness is almost as annoying as "don't get upset, it's only a game."

I love your wit and sarcasm Auntie -

hope you had a great vactation - welcome back

I missed you -

cc\

4.5k · August 14, 2005

When you hide a cache, you are credited with a "hide" in your stats. If you transfer the ownership, your "hide" is erased. That's it, no credit for setting up the cache, maintaining it for however long, etc. What's wrong with keeping the total hides/finds number the same? If you lose a hide, you gain a find, and your total stays the same.

I'd say that if the count is so important to you then just archive the cache and let someone else place one there. You can even be nice and leave them the ammo box. As AW said above, its pretty lame to take credit for a find for something you hid no matter why you are doing it.

A hide is not the same as a find! Your total of owned items is completely different from your found items. This kind of thinking is weird to me. Briansnat offers a good suggestion here for this type of situation..

AuntieWeasel definitely got it right in her response too!

Allow me to join you in crying lame. It isn't a tragedy, a travesty or even a Very Big Deal, but logging your own caches when they've been adopted out (and not even visiting them again for the purpose) is, indeed, LAME.

I agree even more with her on her second second statement!

And lameness is almost as annoying as "don't get upset, it's only a game."

August 15, 2005

I adopted 4 of his micros and Yes, I let him log them all as finds. It's not like he doesn't know where they are. I'm almost positive he's been there before.

Well, yes, that's rather the point. Taking credit for finding something you hid yourself is lame.

Ummm, if they're moving any reasonable distance so that they can't maintain their caches, won't their old caches kind of disappear from their nearest unfound list anyway?

That seems to be an invalid excuse. I've seen people around here log caches they've helped hide as finds, because of course, they can't joint hide (and this predates the ignore list), and they are obviously staying in the area.

August 15, 2005

When I first started caching, I used to get all bent out of shape by "numbers padding"- whether its finds, hides, bugs - whatever.

In the end, it's really unimportant to me what someone has for numbers, or how they go about collecting them. I dont cache for smileys. I dont cache to build somekind of reputation. I cache for myself. I cache to get out, enjoy nature.

I just looked back and realized I once did exactly this.

Found my own cache. Ooops. I might get time and go in and fix it - I might not.

Of course, I could also have posted many finds for being at cache sites, on maintanence trips with other cachers (to thier caches) etc. I didnt.

Its only a problem, if you make it one. Personally, I cant spend time worrying about this kind of thing. Even taking the time to post this is time I'd rather have used for something more productive, and relevant to things i my life.

Oh, I guess I also padded my numbers by posting this too

1.2k · August 15, 2005

Well, yes, that's rather the point. Taking credit for finding something you hid yourself is lame.

While I do agree with you 100% you've also got to consider that it's possible someone could log one of their own cache in place of another one. I've logged one of my own archived caches multiple times because there's a certain cacher who refuses to let me log his caches online (he'll delete them). I still find them, though, and I want my count to be accurate. For me that was the easiest solution.

I'm just saying, before you go crying foul over someone else's number, you'd better be sure yours are all on the up and up.

Ain't that the truth. Profile snooping/crawling/reading/whatever seems to be a big past time here. If it hadn't already been changed I'd invite you all to find my "fake" find. It was logged (in place of one of the caches mentioned above) on something that was archived and went along with a (seemingly genuine) fake log that was already there to create quite the humorous story. That was until someone deleted both of them.

August 15, 2005

I know that kills me too. I couldnt find it so I hid a micro for you. Now I will log the find.

As for my inflated numbers my wife handles the logs and I think there are a few she has done the multi smileys for whatever the cache requested. If there is a double log for seperate finds I am just not aware but do not care enough to go look for it.

Besides, you probably don't have time to police your own logs because you're too busy policing others', eh?

August 15, 2005

Who cares?

The only value the smilies ever caried were intrensic. The last I checked we were not in competition with anyone. Is there some cash for smilies program that I am not aware of?

9.3k · August 15, 2005

Whoever dies with the most smileys wins!

Stock In Smilies Plumets

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation